Corrupt DOJ Gives Evidence of What They Say Are Donald Trump Crimes - to His Lawyers.

originally posted by: Threadbare

He did go to jail if he was intentionally sharing classified information with people not authorized to have that information. And wouldn't you know it, we have him on tape doing that very thing.

So Biden with classified in his garage for years is what?

a reply to: Xtrozero

When the government states to return documents for 18 months and you never once state you should have them or not return them, but instead, blow them off, accept a subpoena for them, but instead move them, hide them, ask your lawyers to destroy them and "pluck out" the bad ones, lie on an attestation to the government, and are on audio discussing "secret" "highly confidential" and "classified" military plans, eh, I think you get exactly what you deserve if the evidence warrants it.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Out of the 200,000 pages collected, only about 300 of those were returned to Trump as being personal documents.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Do you have evidence he was intentionally sharing classified information with unauthorized individuals?

a reply to: Xtrozero

I completely agree. But it's like the only thing they can reach out and git 'em with.

I think it''s disgusting and do not believe he sold them, like others have....

a reply to: CoyoteAngels

Where is anyone saying he sold them? It's certainly not the DOJ.

originally posted by: Threadbare

Do you have evidence he was intentionally sharing classified information with unauthorized individuals?

I have evidence they were in cardboard boxes in an unsecured garage in a house his son lived in as a start, or are you trying to really narrow this down to only what Trump does is illegal.

Also, do you have proof anyone actually read a document Trump was holding? Did Trump say come sit down with me and we can review this document together, or say here is a box of TS go ahead and read what you like?

originally posted by: Threadbare


Where is anyone saying he sold them? It's certainly not the DOJ.

Sell, give, provide, offer, at a level that damages our national security... Did he do any of that? Hillary had an unsecured personal server that the FBI said most likely was hacked by everyone...lol That was OK? Seems the FBI thought it was OK back then.

originally posted by: frogs453

When the government states to return documents for 18 months and you never once state you should have them or not return them, but instead, blow them off, accept a subpoena for them, but instead move them, hide them, ask your lawyers to destroy them and "pluck out" the bad ones, lie on an attestation to the government, and are on audio discussing "secret" "highly confidential" and "classified" military plans, eh, I think you get exactly what you deserve if the evidence warrants it.

Trump's team was working with the National Archives, they knew what he had, there were many discussions between the parties. Even the lock on the door was put there as per request from the archives and all that got blown into a violations of the Espionage Act.

a reply to: Xtrozero

So you don't have any evidence that Biden was intentionally sharing classified information with unauthorized people?

Meanwhile the DOJ has recordings and 84 witnesses that implicate Trump in doing just that. And let's not forget the obstruction charges.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Trump's team told NARA they only had twelve boxes of documents, that turned into the Fifteen Boxes that were given to NARA when they came to collect. And as we now know, that was only a fraction of the documents in his possession.

After he lied to NARA, he failed to comply with a subpoena, lied to federal investigators, and even after a search warrant there's still no guarantee all documents have been recovered.

And even then the DOJ wasn't sure about actually going ahead with charges. It was the Bedminster recording where Trump shares classified information with as unauthorized people that sealed his fate.

originally posted by: Threadbare

So you don't have any evidence that Biden was intentionally sharing classified information with unauthorized people?

Meanwhile the DOJ has recordings and 84 witnesses that implicate Trump in doing just that. And let's not forget the obstruction charges.

The obstruction charge is just an added BS charge as was any other like false claims etc. So has even one witness come forward with explicit information that was in a TS document? You are suggesting they read the documents, or are you saying he waved a document in the air? You kind of need to define your use of the word sharing here, seems you are using it in a generalized way to say if a person was even in the same room as the docs and even not reading them then Trump was sharing.

originally posted by: Threadbare

Trump's team told NARA they only had twelve boxes of documents, that turned into the Fifteen Boxes that were given to NARA when they came to collect. And as we now know, that was only a fraction of the documents in his possession.

After he lied to NARA, he failed to comply with a subpoena, lied to federal investigators, and even after a search warrant there's still no guarantee all documents have been recovered.

And even then the DOJ wasn't sure about actually going ahead with charges. It was the Bedminster recording where Trump shares classified information with as unauthorized people that sealed his fate.

Did not play nice with NARA...WOW! you win...lol

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: frogs453

When the government states to return documents for 18 months and you never once state you should have them or not return them, but instead, blow them off, accept a subpoena for them, but instead move them, hide them, ask your lawyers to destroy them and "pluck out" the bad ones, lie on an attestation to the government, and are on audio discussing "secret" "highly confidential" and "classified" military plans, eh, I think you get exactly what you deserve if the evidence warrants it.

Trump's team was working with the National Archives, they knew what he had, there were many discussions between the parties. Even the lock on the door was put there as per request from the archives and all that got blown into a violations of the Espionage Act.

Ohhh, he was working with them? That would make sense as he accepted the subpoena, however that narrative is blown to pieces by the fact that he then hid, moved, lied about having them, and wanted to destroy documents rather than turn them over. He never wanted to turn them over obviously.

As for the lock, the court filing states they told him to add another lock and keep it on there until he heard back further from the government. It was never as he claimed " oh, it's all good, just add another lock".

originally posted by: frogs453

Ohhh, he was working with them? That would make sense as he accepted the subpoena, however that narrative is blown to pieces by the fact that he then hid, moved and wanted to destroy documents rather than turn them over. He never wanted to turn them over obviously.

As for the lock, the court filing states they told him to add another lock and keep it on there until he heard back further from the government. It was never as he claimed " oh, it's all good, just add another lock".

And tit for tat with NARA is a violation of the Espionage Act.. OK got it...

a reply to: Xtrozero

Willfully holding on to certain documents,destroying,not returning them are all subsections in the Espionage Act.

Willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same

Willful delivery of the information to any person not entitled to receive it or the retention of the information and failure to return it to the United States when demanded.

a reply to: Xtrozero

They didnt count on people seeing thru it and his poll numbers going up after the raid. So they had to double down. To the ridiculous.

I also believe it was to provide cover for old Joe too..... But the people saw thru that as wellllll


Like one of my favorite lady judges says 'They must think we are STUPID!' I laugh everytime.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Charging someone for obstruction when they intentionally hide evidence from investigators is BS?

Once again, the DOJ has 84 witnesses that will be testifying. We know that Margo Martin testified to the grand jury. So it stands to reason she is one of those 84 witnesses.

We can also safely assume that one of those witnesses is the person Trump showed classified maps to.

So where are the witnesses that are claiming Biden showed them classified material?

a reply to: Xtrozero

You're the one that claimed he was cooperating with NARA. No need to get salty because you were clearly wrong.

originally posted by: frogs453

Willfully holding on to certain documents,destroying,not returning them are all subsections in the Espionage Act.

Interesting, so when does Hillary get out of jail as she did them all.